Current weather

GOP puts politics before principles in milk pricing deal

Posted: Friday, November 19, 1999

It's little wonder that folks such as Pat Buchanan and others who believe in more individual freedom and less government regulation are abandoning the Republican Party in search of an organization that's true to conservative principles.

Time and again, the mainstream GOP has demonstrated it's more interested in political expediency and protecting its turf than in adhering to the ideals of the party's founders.

The anemic brand of politics that passes for Republicanism was demonstrated this week when GOP leaders sold their souls to the devil in an effort to get a colleague re-elected to Congress.

The instrument of their betrayal was a provision tucked away in one of the 11th-hour budget bills being rushed through Congress that will maintain price supports for milk .

In an effort to boost the re-election bid of Vermont Sen. James M. Jeffords, a fellow Republican, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois scuttled a modest milk pricing reform program offered by the Agriculture Department.

The cartel is run by dairy farmers, including those in Vermont whose support Jeffords needs to get re-elected next year.

Promoting Jeffords' re-election improves the chances of maintaining a Republican majority in the Senate, which, in turn, would help Lott and Hastert retain their positions of power.

Keeping their jobs is more important to Jeffords, Lott and Hastert than keeping their pledges to downsize government, promote competition and free Americans of unnecessary federal regulations.

Their cowardly retreat on milk price controls makes a mockery of the GOP's standing mandate to cut red tape and end federal subsidies.

An outgrowth of that mandate was the 1996 Freedom to Farm Act, a bill that, among other things, calls for a critical analysis of a Depression-era federal program that based milk prices on how far a dairy farm was from Eau Claire, Wis., considered the center of the nation's dairy industry.

Heeding its orders, the Agriculture Department came up with a plan that didn't entirely eliminate the system, but would have eased government controls considerably.

That alarmed dairy farmers in New England and in the South who benefited the most from controls and price supports. They organized and moved to create regional milk cartels that would control prices to protect them. A temporary cartel was established in New England three years ago, but was set to expire this October.

And while Congress rejected the plan for a Southern cartel, Republican leaders extended the life of the New England cartel for another three years to help Jeffords get re-elected in Vermont.

The National Taxpayers Union, Citizens Against Government Waste, consumer advocates and organizations concerned about the impact higher milk prices will have on nutrition programs for the poor all opposed the milk cartels and continuation of price supports.

They realize that in an open and competitive market, prices are likely to drop. As it is, where the cartel has been in control, prices have risen.

Ironically, the best hope for lesser government regulation and control of the dairy industry lies not with the leaders of the Republican Party, but with President Clinton, who has in the past said he'd veto legislation containing the onerous milk-pricing provisions.

Few Republicans are likely to switch parties and line up behind Clinton in the Democratic camp because their leaders caved in on the dairy issue.

And while most Republicans view the politics of Buchanan as a bit too far to the right to suit their tastes, they may take a second look at him if mainstream party leaders can't stick to their guns on issues as fundamental as eliminating federal subsidies and ending price controls.